ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues

Fantasy Leagues => Armchair Fantasy Baseball => MLB Leagues => Armchair Fantasy Baseball: Archives => Topic started by: chrisetc21 on November 26, 2013, 05:08:45 AM

Title: New Rule Proposal
Post by: chrisetc21 on November 26, 2013, 05:08:45 AM
Just wanted to get thoughts on a new rule for this league.  I propose that any new team owner have a one week period where they can buy out any one contract for 50% of the value of the contract.  This will give new owners a mechanism to cut a large contract without having to give away assets to get rid of the contract.  I just don't think it's fair to give a new owner a team loaded with bad contracts and expect them to deal with the previous owners mistake.  They potentially have to play for years with a hamstrung payroll with no mechanism to get a fresh start and play the game.  It's pretty obvious some owners don't care about two years down the road when they make free agency bids and they'll be abandoning  the team as soon as those decisions come back to haunt them.  In particular I'm talking about Matt Cain earning $33 million per year on Colorado's roster.  Thoughts?
Title: Re: New Rule Proposal
Post by: Lindner on November 26, 2013, 05:36:17 AM
Who in their right mind would offer a 28 year old pitcher $33M/year for 5 years?
Title: Re: New Rule Proposal
Post by: limeygreen on November 26, 2013, 06:58:42 AM
Yes - as Rockies/Cain owner I am facing quite a tough situation (and thus a semi rationale my vetoed recent trade attempt….)

While I see it as quite a good challenge, and am happy to keep my situation as it is, I agreed with the reasoning behind this post. Though whether a  1 or 2 year soft extension (say $10m) to the respective teams salary cap, where they are close to the overall limit when inheriting the team, is another option - giving them the time and flexibility to manage their team more effectively going forward?
Title: Re: New Rule Proposal
Post by: DarylH on November 26, 2013, 07:07:20 PM
I think the idea has merits but what about my team?  I just started a few weeks back and have everyone's favorite player. Arod. And I've already had to dump Sabathia and Texeira. I think all teams would have to be able to do this with one player.
Title: Re: New Rule Proposal
Post by: chrisetc21 on November 26, 2013, 07:19:56 PM
I propose this for new owners, not retroactively applying it to existing owners.
Title: Re: New Rule Proposal
Post by: ThePetis on November 26, 2013, 08:53:08 PM
I think it's a good idea and will only help to encourage more activity in the league.  Put it up for a vote.
Title: New Rule Proposal
Post by: Jss0062 on November 26, 2013, 10:18:21 PM
If we're going down this road the real life NBA amnesty model would work here. Basically a get out of jail free card on one contract within 5 years of the rule passing.  There are a lot of contracts in this league that don't work with a cap that are the fault of the real life teams (i.e. Cliff Lee, Ryan Howard, A-Rod)  Leaving a team stuck with one of those contracts at 50% face value with no production return is really a wash when compared to getting production at an inflated price.  Using Matt Cain as the example, he is probably a $16-$17M player. If he is bought out at 50% the team is stuck with 0 production and a $16.5M bill, they may just as well keep him at an additional $16.5M because that is now what he's worth. . A 100% amnesty would be of greater benefit because it allows for the team to get more value for its money.  Just my thoughts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)
Title: Re: New Rule Proposal
Post by: yahoolando on November 27, 2013, 12:23:40 AM
I think 1 amnesty drop for each team could work.  Just to make it fair all teams would get one.  Then we could introduce a rule for a new owner to have one drop in the upcoming offseason.  I wouldn't allow the drop during the year as it would benefit teams with more cap room and really the benefit to shedding cap during the season is negligible compared to the offseason before FA and Arbitration.  Keep up the good ideas and we can have a vote.
Title: Re: New Rule Proposal
Post by: chrisetc21 on November 27, 2013, 04:06:09 AM
Eh, I think some of you are looking at this as what it can do for you rather than my intention which was how we can add new owners and keep them without burdening them with past cap killing contracts like the Dodgers $80 million Carl Crawford deal.

I think giving amnesty to the whole league is a horrible idea.  I have a very old league that I play in where any new owner gets a week to buy out a contract at half price and sign extensions out of the normal extension period.  It works well to bring in new owners and give them a break from the previous owner's possible mismanagement.  That's all I was suggesting.  Count me as a huge no for league wide amnesty.
Title: Re: New Rule Proposal
Post by: ThePetis on November 27, 2013, 07:49:55 AM
Eh, I think some of you are looking at this as what it can do for you rather than my intention which was how we can add new owners and keep them without burdening them with past cap killing contracts like the Dodgers $80 million Carl Crawford deal.

I think giving amnesty to the whole league is a horrible idea.  I have a very old league that I play in where any new owner gets a week to buy out a contract at half price and sign extensions out of the normal extension period.  It works well to bring in new owners and give them a break from the previous owner's possible mismanagement.  That's all I was suggesting.  Count me as a huge no for league wide amnesty.

I'm on board with Chris's suggestion, but also against the league-wide amnesty.  I also like the idea of allowing a new owner to sign extensions outside of the extension window.  As an example, the Red Sox did not offer an extension to Jacoby Ellsbury in our league.  Due to poor timing, the new owner misses out on a chance to re-sign him.

Title: Re: New Rule Proposal
Post by: yahoolando on November 27, 2013, 11:59:52 AM
Most if the ideas are based on a certain timeline. Keep up the ideas and I hope to come up with a poll. Busy at work right now.

Cheers
Title: Re: New Rule Proposal
Post by: DarylH on November 27, 2013, 01:06:49 PM
Please define new cause I would sure consider myself new.
Title: Re: New Rule Proposal
Post by: yahoolando on November 27, 2013, 01:17:17 PM
Please define new cause I would sure consider myself new.

These are all the issues that will arise and unfortunately there will people that don't agree.  This is the worst part of being the commish as basically you can never make everyone happy but I will come up with a poll and we can vote on it and move forward from that point.

Stay tuned.
Title: Re: New Rule Proposal
Post by: DarylH on November 27, 2013, 01:19:37 PM
I understand that but seeing as how my franchise was ignored for a full season and I had 3 contracts that I think would've fallen under consideration for such a move, being able to do that with one of them would make sense.
Title: New Rule Proposal
Post by: haseloff on November 28, 2013, 05:13:24 PM
I'm down for this. RICK ANKIRL for how many millions over 5 years?  Also, ubaldo?  Really.
Title: Re: New Rule Proposal
Post by: Fitzy1962 on November 29, 2013, 07:52:41 PM
I like the idea of amnestying 1 player for new owners, but agree with what someone said about the 50% buy-out in that the new owner would still be paying for the previous owners mistake by paying half the salary and not getting anything in return while someone else will probably grab that player as a free agent at or around the same price of the owner who had to drop him.

100% amnesty on one-contract would give the new owner a chance to get that player back, if they wanted too.

On the 2nd topic: I would define a "new owner" as one who took over a team before the new season begins.

I also loved the idea of a set time period to allow for extensions.